Now you need to add into the spreadsheet the additional party damage that battlemasters set up by enabling sneak attack from rogue allies. One, two or three rogue allies should be sufficient.
Hah. It's true though, if there's a rogue ally, the Battlemaster gains a ton of value.
By the way, re: Paladins, a couple things.
One is that I'm assuming extremely efficient use of smites.
Two, it might be true that Paladins are the best one-handed damage-dealer, but the Battlemaster beats them when you put two-handed weapons and GWM on the table. At level 11, the Paladin has to forego an ASI to get PAM and GWM, and they actually do worse with GWM than with the ASI. But the Battlemaster can trade Hex for GWM, which boosts them above the Paladin, thanks to the impact of precision attack.
Actually even going to level 12 so the Paladin can have another feat w/o giving up a maxed attack stat, it looks like they're worse off with GWM than without, and the Battlemaster can get a familiar (which on that build is better than getting Hex if you assume 50% help). At that point the gap is pretty wide.
And depending on how often you think you'll get AoOs in melee, the CBE/SS archer may even be slightly better (if you think you get reaction attacks half the time they're not -- at least, not without figuring for cover or long range -- but if you think AoOs a quarter of the time is more realistic, they edge ahead slightly).
That said, the Paladin has so many other great abilities, chiefly the auras, and will have better uses for their spell slots than using all of them for smites, that I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to saying that they're stronger overall. (The ranger, by the way, has a reserve of unused spell slots in this analysis as well)
